“I wouldn’t do it again. Never.”

class=”sc-97fd9fa8-0 jNFKxv”>

On the night of Sunday, July 29, 2018: Léonie Suter* meets two men at the exit, they drink together. Finally she takes a taxi to the apartment of Lucas Peeters*, one of the two, and drinks another.

The 21-year-old college girl goes to bed, but tells the two she doesn’t want sex. With neither. She wakes up when Peeters takes off her jeans. She tells him to stop, continues the 26-year-old.

A standard rape

She calls it standard rape. The court later rules on a failed one-night stand.

Léonie, she says, runs out of the apartment and wanders the streets at dawn until she realizes she left her bag with Peeters. Tries to find the house but fails and goes to the central station. She must look bad: watery eyes and tears.

A stranger takes her to the pharmacy. There she asks for the morning after pill but cannot pay because her bag is missing. The pharmacist hands her a city map that encircles the university hospital.

Léonie is a petite woman, she talks quietly and calmly. Sometimes her hands shake when she talks. She knows that something happened to her that shouldn’t have happened. At the time, she didn’t want to utter the term “rape,” saying, “I thought if I mentioned it, I would have to see myself as a victim, be in a weak position.”

Explored by man

The doctors at the women’s clinic recommend a forensic examination. Léonie is examined by a coroner in the presence of a policewoman. “It’s only Sunday,” the hospital explains that no woman is available. The doctor gives her a drug for HIV prophylaxis.

Rape is an official crime, the police must investigate – even if the victim does not report it. Immediately after the investigation, Léonie is interrogated by a police officer for three hours. She will be home on Sunday evening at 9 p.m.

Victim Support advises her against reporting: the process is stressful and convictions are rare. At the time it irritated her, today she understands this statement. Victim Support refers her to lawyer Brigit Rösli, who often assists victims of sex crimes.

A month later, the nightmares begin. Then there are panic attacks. Her housemate suggests that Léonie seek help from a psychologist. The testified of a post-traumatic stress disorder.

Long interrogation

In December 2018, Léonie Suter was questioned by the public prosecutor. For six hours she has to reveal the most intimate details of that night. The suspect and his lawyer follow the interrogation via video transmission.

“It was bad,” she says today. The prosecutor asked if she hoped for compensation from the ad. Or not have to pay the price for the morning-after pill, 40 francs? At one point, Léonie Suter recalls, the clerk unwraps a slice of bread and bites into it.

The district attorney asks, “How can someone, Mrs. Suter, take off your jeans when you fight back?” That’s hard with tight pants, even with consensual sex.

No should apply in the future

To this day, sexual criminal law states that a woman must make credible that she defended herself by all means – otherwise it is not rape. With the amendment of the law that parliament discussed this week, a no will suffice in the future – even if it is tacit.

The new sex criminal law does not change the evidence problem. Often the statements of the two are the only evidence. If testimony is against testimony, the court must determine who is more credible. Like in the case of Leonie.

When questioned in March 2019, the suspect admitted that although he initiated the sex, it was consensual. Both had wanted it and enjoyed it. When Léonie said “stop” after a while, he stopped immediately. When he asked again afterwards if everything was ok, she said yes. He even told friends about the beautiful night.

Finally, in April 2019, the public prosecutor – reluctantly – filed an indictment. Before that, he asked Léonie Suter if she agreed to an amicable settlement. She refused. The scarce indictment contains several spelling errors, in court he says he is happy that he does not have to make a decision today

In July 2019, the trial will take place before the court in Zurich. Léonie Suter stands before the judges – where the defendant usually stands, not the injured party. “Lucas Peeters said they had an orgasm several times. Didn’t you like it, Mrs. Suter?”

Suter trembles, her lawyer asks Léonie to sit down.

The three court doubts whether the suspect could hear and feel that Léonie did not want sex. She considers both descriptions credible in themselves. In these cases, the accused must be acquitted “in dubio pro reo”. It is a principle of criminal law.

Disappeared inappropriate comments from judgmental reasoning

For Léonie Suter, the chairman’s reasoning is a mockery. She reads from her diary: «The judge says that the truth has not been found today. What happened that night, probably no one knows except those affected. My story left many unanswered questions. How did he get my pants off without damaging them? Why can’t I remember how I threw away the rest of my clothes? Why did I want to go back to the apartment first thing in the morning? . . . He said I seemed like a weak victim: ‘I haven’t understood you very much today, Mrs. Suter. That would have been the moment when they could have stood up for themselves.” He knew something had happened that night that she “didn’t like at all”. But I would have made mistakes.” In the written motivation of the judgment, nothing more can be read of these comments.

After the trial, Léonie feels bad. “I already had the feeling that such an attack could happen again at any time. As soon as I fall asleep, drink alcohol or otherwise become inattentive. And after that verdict I thought: even if that happens, nobody will help you.”

Because her psychologist is on vacation, she reports to the crisis service of the university hospital – just to talk. The crisis service has taken her to a closed psychiatric clinic because of acute suicidality.

Léonie Suter continues the verdict. “I can accept an acquittal, but if so, then it is valid and not riddled with prejudice,” she says. The prosecutor is not participating in the sequel. This means that from now on Léonie only bears the financial risk. She is lucky that lawyer Rösli assists her free of charge.

In December 2020 – two and a half years after the fateful night – Peeters is again acquitted in the Supreme Court. But: “I experienced this process very differently.” The focus was more on his behavior, the reasoning was “reasonably” unbiased. More like it should be.

Léonie is today 25 years old and has completed her studies. She’s better. “I’m glad I reported it then, but I would never do it again. And I wouldn’t recommend it to a colleague. Never.”

*Names changed

Source:Blick